BBE Sonic Maximizer: Still the best exciter?

[Frippertronix]

This thread is destined for at least 40 pages.

I've asked some pros for their feedback on exciter/enhancers. Nothing yet, curious to see what they say. Someone must like using these expensive things, cos they sure aren't selling them to the just-got-my-first-DAW crowd.

Interesting to hear what they say about BBE, both the h/w and the software.

BTW, if anyone knows of an affordable alternative hardware unit that does something similar, but they feel is better, I'd be interested to know what it is. I have no particular attachment to BBE itself, but I like the ability to correct for speaker phase problems.

I am not a big fan of either Marquis or Spectralive, so it would have to be something else if it is going to be software.

BTW, I know I'll be attacked in the most ravenous and rabid ways humanly possible for "dissing" the above two plugins, but the sound just didn't work for me (though I have yet to try SL 2.0).

I respect that many people love these products and I have nothing against the developers, but they have a certain sound that is not my personal favorite.

[Frippertronix]

And...also, RE: my stated opinion about Spectralive and Marquis (just to get it out of the way). I know full well that I am (among other things, probably):

An idiot.
Deaf.
Have cotton in my ears.
Need
Have not only bad taste, but no taste.
Am something akin to a penile member.
Am a naive and puerile babe in the woods when it comes to sound processing.
Should shut up permanently rather than spewing chunks out my hairy, smelly ass about things I know nothing about.
Can do "whatever works for me" as long as I get informed on a daily basis that I am [see above].
May be a troll.
Etc.
Etc.

[Kingston]

So this sucking applies to the h/w unit or no?

I don't like the plugin either but they don't sound remotely similar to me.

well it does sound better as a hardware unit for sure (still fatiquing as the technology is bad), for the exact same reason analog EQs sound better than digital.

but I like the ability to correct for speaker phase problems.

another victim of the marketing bullshit...

Someone must like using these expensive things, cos they sure aren't selling them to the just-got-my-first-DAW crowd.

yeah, but then, penis enhancement pill do sell in massive amounts. as do lots of other homeopathic placebo medicine...

[Frippertronix]

So this sucking applies to the h/w unit or no?

I don't like the plugin either but they don't sound remotely similar to me.

well it does sound better as a hardware unit for sure (still fatiquing as the technology is bad), for the exact same reason analog EQs sound better than digital.

but I like the ability to correct for speaker phase problems.

another victim of the marketing bullshit...

Someone must like using these expensive things, cos they sure aren't selling them to the just-got-my-first-DAW crowd.

yeah, but then, penis enhancement pill do sell in massive amounts. as do lots of other homeopathic placebo medicine...

Do you have a scientific source you can link to that refutes the concepts about phase problems and dynamic speakers that BBE bases their product line on?

I'm not talking about their particular technology, just the premise that inspired it in the first place.

Are there any contrary research findings?

[Frippertronix]

I think I'll email Ted Weber, who is a very well respected American high-end guitar speaker designer and manufacturer. I'd like to know his opinion about whether BBe is entirely based on hype or if the core concept is at least based in reality.

[Kingston]

Are there any contrary research findings?

yeah... the ears. hehe. but on a more serious note, let me go dig up the article that started my disrespect towards the BBE process.

[Frippertronix]

Kingston, I'd be interested to know what products, either hard or soft, do you prefer to use to boost high frequencies (if you do any boosting). Which do you not find fatiguing, if any.

[Kingston]

I think I'll email Ted Weber, who is a very well respected American high-end guitar speaker designer and manufacturer. I'd like to know his opinion about whether BBe is entirely based on hype or if the core concept is at least based in reality.

Why don't simply trust your ears instead? if you like it, fine, but if you don't, well that's just fine too.

Why do you need someone to tell you what you should like or not?

[bduffy]

And...also, RE: my stated opinion about Spectralive and Marquis (just to get it out of the way). I know full well that I am (among other things, probably):

An idiot.
Deaf.
Have cotton in my ears.
Need
Have not only bad taste, but no taste.
Am something akin to a penile member.
Am a naive and puerile babe in the woods when it comes to sound processing.
Should shut up permanently rather than spewing chunks out my hairy, smelly ass about things I know nothing about.
Can do "whatever works for me" as long as I get informed on a daily basis that I am [see above].
May be a troll.
Etc.
Etc.

Hey, if it makes you feel any better, I don't really care for the Voxengo stuff either. I've always been a bit put off by their interfaces, they just don't fit with me. I liked Marquis, it was by far the most logical device I've tried from them, but still I don't feel that oomph from it. I much prefer, say, Compadre or Tbt plugins for drum-smashing. And I know there are a few people around here who respect ,but just don't get, the Voxengo line. So you're not alone.

I do love Specralive, though. Like I said, it's voice-over magic.

[Kingston]

ok here it is, I didn't find the exact same one but this one will do just fine:

http://eng.iaudio.com/product/product_b ... at's%20BBE

the most important bit:

The BBE Process, which provides a linear phase advance in proportion to the frequency, is placed before the MP process. The MP process evenly generates higher harmonics from the entire audio bandwidth. Since the BBE-processed sound has a tapered time alignment (the higher the frequency, the more time advance), the generated harmonics are time-advanced in the higher frequencies. This allows the brain to analyze the sound more easily with the least amount of added harmonics.

That same process is used to "compensate for speaker frequency mis-alignment" in a slightly different deviation.

But what they describe is the ideal world. The reality is that doing a process like that using standard digital filters (or equal analog conterparts) is going to amount into one helluva phasey mess.

[bduffy]

I think I'll email Ted Weber, who is a very well respected American high-end guitar speaker designer and manufacturer. I'd like to know his opinion about whether BBe is entirely based on hype or if the core concept is at least based in reality.

Why don't simply trust your ears instead? if you like it, fine, but if you don't, well that's just fine too.

Why do you need someone to tell you what you should like or not?

Now hold on, Kingston; I think a big part of the debate is whether seasoned professionals take enhancers - or more specifically this phase stuff - seriously. He's not going to know if he doesn't ask one.

[Kingston]

Kingston, I'd be interested to know what products, either hard or soft, do you prefer to use to boost high frequencies (if you do any boosting). Which do you not find fatiguing, if any.

Right now I use the EQ in my mixer, posihfopit, PLpar, hydratone, or combinations of several compressors with the aforementioned.

Then there's this plugin called Retroband by certain {cough} author, which will be released some time in the not too distant future. It perfectly suits this task...

[Frippertronix]

I think I'll email Ted Weber, who is a very well respected American high-end guitar speaker designer and manufacturer. I'd like to know his opinion about whether BBe is entirely based on hype or if the core concept is at least based in reality.

Why don't simply trust your ears instead? if you like it, fine, but if you don't, well that's just fine too.

Why do you need someone to tell you what you should like or not?

It's not a matter of liking it, since I don't find it as fatiguing as you do, but I'm definitely interested if it is doing what it says for the reasons BBE says, or if they have exagerrated or misrepresented something significantly. If so (and someone can show some research or physics principles that help prove that) it might lead me to:

A) Try to find a better product to do something similar, or

B) Take it out of my rack for a while, redo all of my EQ settings to compensate, and sit back for several days deciding if I like it better that way.

I'm not convinced the differences wouldn't be subtle, so I'm looking for more hard evidence that there is a reason to conduct the whole experiment. It would take some time and effort to finally decide what "my ears would tell me", so right now I'm just looking for some well documented refutation of BBE's whole premise before I bother to conduct the experiment.

Like I said, my 462 rack unit doesn't offend my ears as it is, but I'm always interested in improvements, so I'm open minded about the possibility I'd be better off without it.

Bypassing the 462 is no help at all, since it isn't true bypass and the bypass mode sounds terrible (almost enough to think they made it that way on purpose ).

[Frippertronix]

Then there's this plugin called Retroband by certain {cough} author, which will be released some time in the not too distant future. It perfectly suits this task...

Will it be payware?

[Frippertronix]

BTW, I emailed Ted Weber and I'll be fascinated by his response about the whole "world of BBE". There are few people on the planet who know traditional dynamic loudspeakers better, and he's usually good about answering questions.